New Bill Ties School Funding to Mandatory Parental Notification on Student Gender Identity Exploration

The “Empower Parents to Protect their Kids Act of 2025” is a federal policy proposal that gets right to the heart of the ongoing fight over parental rights and school autonomy. Simply put, this bill says that if an elementary or secondary school wants to keep receiving federal funding, they have to implement strict rules about how staff handle students under 18 who are exploring a gender identity different from their biological sex. Specifically, schools must get explicit parental consent before taking any action to affirm a student’s non-biological gender identity—and they are strictly forbidden from hiding information about that exploration from parents.

The New Rules for Teachers and Counselors

This isn't just about a one-time conversation; it's a comprehensive change to how schools interact with students exploring their identity. The bill defines “sex” biologically and then bans school employees from encouraging, pressuring, or tricking students into keeping information about their identity exploration secret from their parents. Crucially, it prohibits staff from withholding information about a student wanting to transition, expressing discomfort with their sex, or otherwise expressing an identity inconsistent with their biological sex. For school counselors and teachers, this means the end of confidential conversations regarding gender identity exploration, unless the student is reporting physical abuse (a narrow exception defined in the bill).

What “Affirming” Means in Practice

What counts as an “action meant to affirm a student’s identity”? The bill is clear: staff cannot move forward with any action intended to affirm an identity different from the student's biological sex without parental consent. This includes things like using a student’s preferred name or pronouns that don't match their records, allowing them to use a different bathroom or locker room, or even referring them to outside medical providers for transition procedures. For a busy school administrator, this means every interaction involving a student’s gender expression suddenly becomes a potential compliance issue tied directly to the school’s federal budget.

The Litigation Hammer: Who Can Sue and Why

Perhaps the biggest practical shift in this bill is the creation of a clear, fast track to the courthouse. If a school violates these rules—say, a teacher uses a student’s preferred name without parental consent—an affected parent or the U.S. Attorney General can file a civil lawsuit immediately. They don't have to wade through administrative appeals or local school board meetings first. If the parent wins, the court must grant relief, including covering the parent’s legal fees. Even more impactful, the court can order the school to pay for treatments or therapy needed to “repair harm” to the child resulting from pursuing a gender transition, provided medical providers agree it’s necessary. This puts school districts on the hook for potentially massive legal and therapeutic costs, creating a huge financial incentive for strict compliance.

The Real-World Trade-Offs

For parents who feel schools have overstepped their bounds, this bill offers a powerful mechanism for control and transparency. If you’re a parent who believes schools should never keep secrets from you, this bill delivers that certainty, backed by the threat of losing federal funds. However, for students who are exploring their identity and whose home environment might not be safe or supportive, this bill eliminates the one place—the school—where they might have found confidential support. The mandatory disclosure provision removes the privacy net, potentially forcing vulnerable kids to disclose sensitive information to parents who may react negatively, even violently. While the bill includes a narrow exception for reporting physical abuse, it does not account for emotional abuse or neglect related to gender identity, leaving school staff with the difficult choice between violating federal law and violating a student’s trust and safety.